Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Baxter on the Provision of Affluent Estates
Baxter on the Provision of Affluent Estates
Aug 7, 2026 3:27 PM

Regarding John Armstrong’s insightful post yesterday, I want to pass along some related wisdom on the subject from Richard Baxter from his 1682 treatise, How to do Good to Many. Writing on the text of Galatians 6:10, he writes about the problem and responsibility of passing along wealthy estates to heirs:

III. The Text plainly intimateth that it is a great Crime in them, that instead of doing good while they have opportunity, think it enough to leave it by Will to their Executors to do it. When they have lived to the flesh, and cannot take it with them, they think it enough to leave others to do that good, which they had not a heart to do themselves: But a treasure must be laid up in heaven before-hand, and not be left to be sent after, Matth. 6. 20, 21. And he that will make friends of the Mammon of Unrighteousness, must now be rich towards God, Luk. 12. 21. It’s no victory over the World, to leave it when you cannot keep it: Nor will any Legacy purchase Heaven for an unholy worldly soul.

IV. Yet they that will do good neither Living nor Dying are worst of all. Surely the last Acts of our Lives, if possible, should be the best; And as we must live in health, so also in sickness, and to the last in doing all the good we can; and therefore it must needs be a great sin, to leave our Estates to those that are like to do hurt with them, or to do no good, so far as we are the free disposers of them.

The Case, I confess is not without considerable difficulties, how much a man is bound to leave to his Children, or his neerest Kindred, when some of them are disposed to live unprofitably, and some to live ungodly and hurtfully. Some think men are bound to leave them nothing, some think they ought to leave them almost all: And some think that they should leave them only so much as may find them tolerable food and raiment. I shall do my best to decide the case in several propositions.

The Case is not with us as it was with the Israelites, who might not alienate their Inheritances from the Tribes. Yet even they had power to prefer a younger Son, that was more deserving, before an Elder that was worse.Where either Law or Contract have disabled a man to alienate his Estate from an ungodly Heir, there is no room for a doubt what he must do.Nature teacheth all men to prefer a Child that is pious and hopeful, in his provisions and Legacies before a stranger that is somewhat better, and not to alienate his Estate for want of a higher degree of goodness.When there is a just cause to disinherit an elder Son, a younger is to be preferred before a Stranger; or a Kinsman if there be no tolerable Son.And a Son that ought not to be trusted with Riches or a great Estate, yet ought to have Food and Raiment; (unless e to that State of obstinate rebellion in sin, for which God’s manded the Israelites to bring forth their Sons to be put to death: In such Cases the house of Correction is fittest for them.) Yet should he have such food as may humble him, and not to gratifie his lust.If a man that hath the full power to dispose of his Estate, real or personal, have Sons and Kindred that according to the Judgment of sound reason, are like, if they had his Estate, to do mischief with it, or maintain them in a wicked life, or in a meer unprofitable Life of idleness, living only to themselves and fleshly ease and pleasure, That man ought to give his Estate from such to some that are liker to do good with it, and to use it for God, and the publick benefit.

This is much contrary to mon course of most, that think no Estate too great for their Heirs, nor any Portion too great for their Daughters, be they what they will, or what use soever they are like to make of it: But these following reasons prove it to be true.

I. Every man hath his Estate from God, and for God, and is bound as his Steward accordingly to use it. This is past doubt: And how doth that man use it for God, who leaveth it to one that is liker to use it for the Devil in a fleshly unprofitable Life? What account can such a Steward give? Did God give it you to maintain idleness and sin?

Obj. O but it is a Son whom I am bound to provide for. Ans. Are you more bound to your Son than to your Self? God doth not allow you to spend it on your self, to maintain Idleness and Vice, Rom. 13. 13, 14. Make no provision for the flesh to satisfie the lust (or will) thereof. And may you leave it for such a use as is forbidden both your Son and You? It is God that is the owner of it, and it is to him that you must both use and leave it: Whether you Eat or Drink or whatever you do, do all to the Glory of God. And will you leave it to be the fuel of lust, and sin?

Obj. I leave it not for sin: but if he misuse it, I cannot help it. Ans. Would that excuse you if you put a Sword into a mad man’s hand, to say, I cannot help it if he use it ill? You might have helpt it: It’s supposed that you fore-knew how he was like to use it.

Obj. But he may prove better hereafter, as some do. Ans. It is not bare possibilities, that must guide a wise man’s Actions when probability is against them. Would mit your Children to the care of a Mad man or a Knave, because he may e to his Wits, or e honest? Have you not long tried him, and have you not endeavour’d to cure him of his Idleness, wickedness or lust? If it be not done, what ground have you to presume it will be done when you are dead? You may have so much hope as not utterly to despair of him: But that will not allow you to trust him with that which God made you Steward of for his use and service.

But if such hopes may be gratified, give your estate in trust to some Conscionable friend, with secret order to give it your Son or Kinsman, if he e hereafter fit to use it, according to the ends for which God giveth it.

Reas. 2. The Obligation in my Text of doing good to all, extendeth to the end of our lives: And therefore to our last Will and Testament. Therefore you must make your Wills so as may do good to all, and not to cherish sin and idleness.

Reas. 3. You are bound to your best to destroy sin and idleness, and therefore not to feed and cherish it.

Reas. 4. Doing good is the very thing which you are Created, Redeemed and Sanctified for; and therefore you must extend your endeavours to the uttermost and to the last, that as much as may be, may be done when you are dead. If Magistrates and Ministers took care for no longer than their own lives, what would e of the State or Church?

Reas. 5. The Common good is better than the plenty of a sinful Child: Yea it is to be preferred before the best Child, and before our selves. And therefore much more before the worst.

Reas. 6. It’s a dreadful thing to be guilty of all the fleshly sins, which your ungodly Sons mit with your estate; when they shall by it maintain the sins of Sodom, Pride, Fulness of Bread, and abundance of Idleness: If not to strengthen their hands for oppression or Persecution. To think that they will spend their days in voluptuousness, because you gave them provision for the flesh.

Reas. 7. It is cruelty to them that are already so bad, to make their temptations to sin much stronger, and their place in Hell the worse, and to make the way to Heaven as hard to them as for a Camel to go through the eye of a needle: To prepare them to want a drop of water in Hell, who were clothed richly and fared sumptuously on Earth. To entice them to say, Soul take thine ease thou hast enough laid up for many years, till they hear: fool this night shall they require thy Soul; to cherish that love of the world, which is enmity to God, by feeding that lust of the flesh and lust of the eyes, and Pride of life, which are not of the Father, but of the world.

Reas. 8. When this preferring unprofitable and ungodly Children before God and the Common good, is mon and Reigning a sin in the world, it is a great fault for Religious Men to encourage them in it, by their example, and to do as they.

Reas. 9. It is a sin to cast away any of God’s gifts. When Christ had fed men by a Miracle, he saith, gather up the fragments that nothing be lost: If you should cast your mony into the Sea, it were a crime: But to leave it to such as you foresee are most likely to use it sinfully, is more than casting it away. If you saw men offer Sacrifice to Bacchus or Venus, you would abhor it. Do not that which is so like it, as to leave bad men fuel for fleshly lust.

Reas. 10. It is the more dreadful, because it is dying in studyed sin without repentance. To put so much sin into one’s Will, shews a full consent and leaveth no room and time to repent of it.

On all these accounts I advise all the Stewards of God, as they love him and the publick good and their own Souls, while they have opportunity, even to the last breath, to do good to all, and to provide more for mon good than for superfluities to any, and than for the maintaining ungodly Children in sin, to the increase of their guilt and misery.

Indeed in the choice of a Calling, employment and condition of life, and place for their Children, doing good should be preferred before their rising in the world: And they that justly endeavour to raise their Families in wealth, honour or power, should do it only; that they might do the more good. But it is Satan’s design to turn all God’s mercies to the cherishing of wickedness, and even the Love of Parents to their Children to the poisoning of their Souls, the strengthening of their snares, and the hinderance of their own and other men’s Salvation. But it’s shame and pity, that they who in Baptism devoted their Children to God, the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, renounceing the world the flesh and the Devil, as under the banner of the Cross, should labour all their life, that impenitently at death they may leave all hat they can get to such as in all probability will use it in pride, fulness and idleness, for the flesh, the world and the Devil, against him and his interest from whom they received it, and to whom both they and all they had were once devoted.

When men are loth that their estates should remove from the Name and Family (for which there may be just cause) I take it for the safest way, (as aforesaid) to trust some (as men do their Children with Guardians) by the advise of Lawyers, to secure all from their unworthy heirs, for the next or some other of the name and lineage that proveth worthy.

There are many other good works by which some rich men may be very profitable to the Common-wealth, such as setting all the poor on work, and building Hospitals for the Impotent, &c. But these this City is happily acquainted with already, and tho still there be much wanting, yet there is much done.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Amnesty International: Release Nigerian Schoolgirls But Legalize Prostitution
Yesterday, Joe Carter wrote about Boko Haram, the terrorist group that has kidnapped hundreds of girls in Nigeria from the Christian school, and is now threatening to sell them into the sex trafficking trade. Salil Shetty, Secretary General of the human rights organization Amnesty International, is calling upon the Nigerian government to initiate a transparent investigation of the girls’ kidnapping and an immediate release of the girls. The horrific abduction shows the serious nature of violations of international humanitarian and...
Deirdre McCloskey on Ethics and Rhetoric in the ‘Great Enrichment’
In a marvelous speech on the origins of economic freedom (and its subsequent fruits), Deirdre McCloskey aptly crystallizes the deeper implications of her work on bourgeois virtuesand bourgeoisdignity. For example, though many doubted that those in once-socialistic India e to see markets favorably, eventually those attitudes changed, and with it came prosperity. As McCloskey explains: The leading Bollywood films changed their heroes from the 1950s to the 1980s from bureaucrats to businesspeople, and their villains from factory owners to policemen,...
Kishore Jayabalan: ‘Say “No” to Government Expansion’
Kishore Jayabalan, director of the Istituto Acton in Rome, recently wrote an article at Aleteia, titled ‘Freedom, Truth, & State Power: The Case for Religious and Economic Freedom.’ He begins his piece with a statement Gerald R. Ford made soon after ing president: “A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.” Jayabalan continues: Trust in our political leaders increased around the time of the September 11,...
Why McDonald’s Has Become a School for Remedial Work Skills
“Clean up your own mess. Your mother doesn’t work here.” That was a sign, printed on dot matrix printer paper, which hung in the breakroom of the McDonald’s where I worked. While that was nearly thirty years ago, I suspect that same sign is still there (though probably reprinted on a laser printer). But the idea behind it has changed. Your mother may not work at McDonalds, but pany—and others that hire low-skilled employees—are increasingly taking on the role of...
The Dignity of Chickens and the Character of God
After a farmer in Australia had a change of heart about keeping his chickens in battery cages, he freed all 752 hens. The video below (via Rod Dreher) shows the chickens taking their first steps on soil, and feeling sunshine for the first time. What is your initial reaction on seeing the video? Did you roll your eyes at the liberal-leaning, anti-business, vegetarian-loving motive that surely inspired the clip? Did you automatically assume the “animal rights” nuts (the video was...
Samuel Gregg: Indivisibility Of Religious Liberty, Economic Freedom
Sam Gregg, Acton’s director of research, makes the case that limiting religious liberty also infringes upon economic growth in The American Spectator. Gregg uses history to illustrate the point. Unjust restrictions on religious liberty e in the form of limiting the ability of members of particular faiths to participate fully in public life. Catholics in the England of Elizabeth I and James I, for instance, were gradually stripped of most of their civil and political rights because of their refusal...
Poverty, Justice, and Christian Love
“We have replaced charity with humanitarianism, says Michael Matheson Miller in the first of this week’s Acton Commentary, “a hollowed-out secular and materialist vision of Christian love.” Concern for the poor is at the heart of Christianity. Saint John Paul II called poverty one of the greatest moral challenges of our time, and to ignore the plight of the poor has consequences for our eternal souls. Pope Francis addressed poverty in Evangelii Gaudium: “Almost without being aware of it, we...
G.K. Chesterton on the work of mothers
Our discussions about faith-work integration often focus on paid labor, yet there is plenty of value, meaning, and fulfillment in other areas where the market may assign little to no direct dollars and cents. I’ve written about this previously as it pertains to fatherhood, but given the ing holiday, the work of mothers is surely worthy of some pause and praise. My wife stays at home full-time with our three small children, and I can’t count the number of times...
Is Mass Incarceration the New Eugenics?
“Has the War on Drugs revived the 19th Century progressive crusade against ‘degenerates’?” asks Anthony Bradley in the second of this week’s Acton Commentary. The United States currently has over 2.3 million prisoners incarcerated in federal, state, and local jails around the country. According to an April report by the Sentencing Project, that number presents a 500 percent increase in incarcerations over the past 40 years. This increase produces “prison overcrowding and fiscal burdens on states to modate a rapidly...
An Open Letter Regarding Greece v. Galloway
Katherine Stewart is most unhappy about the recent Supreme Court decision, Greece v. Galloway. The Court upheld the right of the town of Greece, New York, to being town hall meetings with prayer, so long as no one was coerced into participating. And that makes Ms. Stewart unhappy. In an op-ed piece for The New York Times, Ms. Stewart decries the Court’s decision as something akin to a vast, right-wing conspiracy. The first order of business is to remove objections...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved